Taking responsibility
Posted by Rosa Brooks
It's good to see that top Army brass are taking responsibility for the poor conditions and inadequate support provided to injured soldiers at Walter Reed. But it's ironic that more people have now lost their jobs over the issue of inadequate care for wounded soldiers than over the war that left those soldiers wounded in the first place. Rumsfeld resigned... very belatedly. When will Dick Cheney resign? Hmm, and when can we expect to see the President resign? If we're to believe Chuck Hagel, resigning just might be the only honorable way out for a President who seems to believe he's "not accountable anymore."


It's untrue that the Army brass are taking responsibility, that Rumsfeld resigned and that Hagel is suggesting Bush resign. In fact, Gates has fired three top Army figures, Rummy was fired and Hagel is suggesting impeachment for Bush. The difference is more than semantics. The "taking responsibility" in each case was external not internal. This can be extended to the current destructive US foreign policy--it won't change because of internal forces but by external forces, i.e. the people aligned against the government. The lack of accountability you mention extends beyond Bush to include Congress and the Supremes. Aren't we fortunate to live in a democracy. Say what?
Posted by: Don Bacon | March 12, 2007 at 06:26 PM